View Poll Results: Would you vote for Herman Cain for president?

Voters
356. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    164 46.07%
  • No

    192 53.93%
Page 70 of 72 FirstFirst ... 20606869707172 LastLast
Results 691 to 700 of 718

Thread: Herman Cain for president?

  1. #691
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,114

    Re: Herman Cain for president?

    hey bigfoot! let's just raise the minimum wage to $100,000,000 an hour and we can ALL BE RICH!!!


  2. #692
    Professor
    Bigfoot 88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    12-01-15 @ 06:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    2,027
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Herman Cain for president?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    hey bigfoot! let's just raise the minimum wage to $100,000,000 an hour and we can ALL BE RICH!!!

    I agree

    After all, it would help business
    "I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money." -Thomas Sowell

  3. #693
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,114

    Re: Herman Cain for president?

    gosh, yeah. imagine how much stuff we could buy if we all made 100 mil an hour.

    good thing that labor costs aren't part of the price of production, eh? whew, our brilliant plan could really go down the tubes, then.

  4. #694
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,547

    Re: Herman Cain for president?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    gosh, yeah. imagine how much stuff we could buy if we all made 100 mil an hour.

    good thing that labor costs aren't part of the price of production, eh? whew, our brilliant plan could really go down the tubes, then.
    when I was in Bolivia, the going wage for day labor was ten grand. That's right, ten thousand big ones!

    Then thousand Bolivianos, that is, about 80 cents in our money.

    Just increasing the numbers isn't going to help. We need to increase productivity, then pay workers accordingly.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  5. #695
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    06-18-11 @ 09:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    690

    Re: Herman Cain for president?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    no, because they would have been unemployed.
    No, they would have been employed at higher wages, making it possible for them to go to the stores and buy things, stimulating the economy. Also, not only would they have been able to buy things, but so would the many more people who would have been employed, as a result of the added income to the businesses from increased sales, creating increased hiring, and more employment.

  6. #696
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    06-18-11 @ 09:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    690

    Re: Herman Cain for president?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigfoot 88 View Post
    And when those employees made 20 bucks an hour, their employer's business would fail and you wouldn't have any customers.
    The answer to that is in the post that you were responding to and also post # 695.

  7. #697
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    06-18-11 @ 09:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    690

    Re: Herman Cain for president?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    gosh, yeah. imagine how much stuff we could buy if we all made 100 mil an hour.

    good thing that labor costs aren't part of the price of production, eh? whew, our brilliant plan could really go down the tubes, then.
    Hiding behind humor. The first sign that your debate opponent is finding himself without an answer to counter what has just been said to him. Ho hum. OK funny boys. What do you have to say about the disposeable income point ? I notice you haven't addressed it. Humor doesn't count.

  8. #698
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,114

    Re: Herman Cain for president?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scanner View Post
    No, they would have been employed at higher wages, making it possible for them to go to the stores and buy things, stimulating the economy.
    no, because if they weren't making $20 an hour, then their labor wasn't worth $20 an hour, which means anyone who hired them at that rate would be operating at a loss and would go out of business.


    labor, like everything else, operates according to the laws of supply and demand. if you artificially hike up the price, you see a fall in demand.

    Also, not only would they have been able to buy things, but so would the many more people who would have been employed, as a result of the added income to the businesses from increased sales, creating increased hiring, and more employment.
    no, because prices would have gone up along with wages. Labor, you see, is part of the price of production. If I make tables, and the cost it takes me to have a worker make a table goes up by $400 because now his wage has been artificially raised, then all that has happened is that I now have to raise the price of my table by $400.


    they tried what you are suggesting back in the 1930's. It Prolonged The Depression by Seven Years.

  9. #699
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,114

    Re: Herman Cain for president?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scanner View Post
    Hiding behind humor. The first sign that your debate opponent is finding himself without an answer to counter what has just been said to him. Ho hum. OK funny boys. What do you have to say about the disposeable income point ?
    that people who have no jobs have no disposable income. and that when you increase the cost of labor, all that you do is lower the demand for labor, meaning that there are fewer jobs and more people get fired.

    price floors always produce scarcity.

  10. #700
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    06-18-11 @ 09:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    690

    Re: Herman Cain for president?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    no, because if they weren't making $20 an hour, then their labor wasn't worth $20 an hour, which means anyone who hired them at that rate would be operating at a loss and would go out of business.


    labor, like everything else, operates according to the laws of supply and demand. if you artificially hike up the price, you see a fall in demand.



    no, because prices would have gone up along with wages. Labor, you see, is part of the price of production. If I make tables, and the cost it takes me to have a worker make a table goes up by $400 because now his wage has been artificially raised, then all that has happened is that I now have to raise the price of my table by $400.


    they tried what you are suggesting back in the 1930's. It Prolonged The Depression by Seven Years.
    1. But they wouldn't be operating at a loss, they would be making MORE money from the increase in DISPOSEABLE INCOME (and thereby sales increases), which you all seem to keep ignoring and not talking about.

    2. Now (by saying "prices would have gone up along with wages") this shows you are not aware of one of the basics of Microeconomics 101 (a course I once taught in college). Business owners cannot raise the prices of products. We have little or no control over them (for almost all commodities). Prices are set by the market. It is a result of what buyers expect that something is supposed to cost. People have firm ideas about that. It is a very difficult thing to change.
    Problem with raising prices (in response to minimum wage raises or whatever) is that when you do, sales drop off. That's because, in practice, all businesses have their price set at the market price. That is the price you see stuff selling for. It is the highest price they can have without sales dropping enough to cause a loss of business income.

    Graphically this is drawn as a bell-shaped curve with income on the vertical Y axis, and prices on the horizontal X axis. As prices go up from zero, so does income until it reaches the market price (at the top of the bell). From that point on, you have the right side of the bell, where prices are going up (this is the price hike you mentioned), but now income is dropping (along with the drop in sales), and you have the right side of the bell.

    3. Re: the UCLA study,There are too many things going on differently in 2011 than there were 80 years ago, to use whtever happened back then as some sort of a guideline to predict current economic activity. There are literally dozens of differences, each one geometrically expanding into spin-off differences. I'd say the study is flawed, and I'm not even sure if the writers are analyzing Roosevelt correctly. I noticed right in the beginning they said something like when price go down, demand for goods goes down. No, under that condition demand for the goods goes up and so does sales.
    Last edited by Scanner; 06-05-11 at 10:31 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •